Key result
T-TEER achieves similar procedural and 1-month clinical success in atrial vs. ventricular secondary TR.
Why the study?
Whether the secondary tricuspid regurgitation phenotype—atrial versus ventricular—influences outcomes following T-TEER remains incompletely defined, limiting tailored patient selection and optimal intervention timing.
Does atrial secondary tricuspid regurgitation (ASTR) phenotype compared to ventricular secondary tricuspid regurgitation (VSTR) influence procedural success and short-term clinical outcomes in patients with severe STR undergoing T-TEER?
Cohort (n=71)
Yes
Does atrial secondary tricuspid regurgitation (ASTR) phenotype compared to ventricular secondary tricuspid regurgitation (VSTR) influence procedural success and short-term clinical outcomes in patients with severe STR undergoing T-TEER?
T-TEER provides comparable short-term procedural and clinical success in both atrial and ventricular secondary tricuspid regurgitation phenotypes, with atrial STR patients achieving superior rates of optimal TR reduction (≤1+) at discharge.
Comparable success observed in this cohort does not support practice change; leaves open randomized comparisons of tricuspid interventions.
Background Secondary tricuspid regurgitation (STR) comprises two distinct phenotypes: atrial STR (ASTR), driven by right atrial dilatation with preserved RV function, and ventricular STR (VSTR), characterised by RV remodeling and leaflet tethering. Whether STR phenotype influences outcomes following T-TEER remains incompletely defined, limiting the ability to tailor patient selection and optimize intervention timing. Aim To compare baseline characteristics, procedural outcomes, and short-term clinical results of patients with ASTR versus VSTR undergoing T-TEER in a real-world, two-centre European cohort. Methods Consecutive patients with severe STR undergoing T-TEER at two tertiary referral centers - were retrospectively analyzed. ASTR was defined as severe STR with preserved LVEF (≥50%), normal RV function, absence of significant left-sided valvular disease, and low pulmonary pressures (sPAP ≤50 mmHg), consistent with a predominantly atrial and annular mechanism. All remaining patients were classified as VSTR. Exclusion criteria were primary (organic) TR and TR attributable to a cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) lead. The primary endpoint was procedural success (TR reduction to ≤2+) and clinical success at 1 month (TVARC criteria). The secondary endpoint was mortality and HF hospitalization at 3 months. Results A total of 71 patients were included (ASTR n=17, 23.9%; VSTR n=54, 76.1%). Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Mean age was 75.3±10.7 years; 35.2% were male and 84.5% had atrial fibrillation. ASTR patients exhibited significantly higher LVEF (67.2±9.6% vs 58.0±9.5%, p=0.001), better TAPSE (20.8±3.9 vs 18.0±4.2 mm, p=0.020), and lower sPAP (39.2±6.9 vs 51.4±17.5 mmHg, p<0.0005), with no differences in age, TRI-SCORE, EuroSCORE II, or renal function. The most frequently used device was PASCAL (88.2% in ASTR vs 68.5% in VSTR), followed by Triclip (11.8% vs 31.5%). Procedural success at 24h was comparable between groups (88.2% vs 92.6%, p=0.625), as was 1-month clinical success (88.2% vs 87.0%, p=1.000). ASTR achieved a higher rate of in-hospital TR reduction to ≤1+ (82.4% vs 55.7%, p=0.042). At 3 months, diuretic dose reduction was numerically more frequent in ASTR (44.4% vs 18.8%, p=0.165). Mortality (0% vs 15%, p=0.177) and HF hospitalization (9.1% vs 35.0%, p=0.115) trended favorably in ASTR. Conclusions T-TEER demonstrated comparable procedural success across both phenotypes, confirming suitability regardless of etiology. ASTR patients achieved a significantly higher rate of TR reduction to ≤1+ at discharge (82.4% vs 55.7%, p=0.042). No significant differences were observed in mortality or HF hospitalization. Routine STR phenotyping before T-TEER is strongly encouraged, and prospective validation in larger phenotype-stratified cohorts is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mansour et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Severe secondary tricuspid regurgitation undergoing tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (n=71). Atrial secondary tricuspid regurgitation (ASTR) phenotype undergoing T-TEER vs. Ventricular secondary tricuspid regurgitation (VSTR) phenotype undergoing T-TEER was evaluated on Procedural success (TR reduction to ≤2+) at 24h and clinical success at 1 month (TVARC criteria) (p=0.625).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: